Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
1) In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
2) The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
3) Claims 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 10, there is no antecedent basis for “the circumferential sipe” and, as such, the scope of claim 10 is ambiguous. In claim 10, it is suggested to change “the circumferential sipe” to --the circumferential groove--.
In claim 13 line 2, there is no antecedent basis for “the first end” and, as such, the scope of claim 13 is ambiguous.
4) The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
5) Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radulescu 288 (US 6,196,288) in view of Bourdon (US 2,240,542) and optionally Lurois (US 5,896,905) and/or Japan 775 (JP 2007-050775).
Radulescu 288 discloses a heavy duty truck tire having a tread comprising ribs separated by circumferential grooves. Each rib comprises one end open sipes 12 (micro sipes) extending from a circumferential groove, terminating within the rib and defining “rib elements” wherein the sipes have a width of 0.20 to 0.40 mm, a length of
4 to 8 mm and a pitch (circumferential spacing) of 4 to 8 mm [FIGURES 1-2, 3A-3B,
col. 8 lines 23-43]. The sipes improve retarding irregular wear [col. 4 lines 38-40].
The sipes are inclined at an angle of 5 to 15 degrees with respect to the radial direction to increase robustness of ribs with respect to irregular wear [FIGURE 13, col. 10 lines 28-40]. Radulescu 288 substantially discloses the claimed invention except for the leading edge and the trailing edge being at different distances to the central axis in the radial direction.
As to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Radulescu 288’s heavy duty truck tire such that each rib element delimited by adjacent one end open sipes 12 defines a portion of the circumferential groove, the rib element has an upper surface in the radial direction, the upper surface has a leading edge and a trailing edge in the circumferential direction, the leading edge and the trailing edge are at different distances to the central axis in the radial direction, and the outer surface of the tread at a portion of the rib that is adjacent the upper surface of the rib element in the lateral direction is located at a same distance from the central axis in the radial direction about the circumferential direction since (1) Bourdon teaches providing a vehicle tire having a tread comprising ribs separated by circumferential grooves and arranging slits 17 (sipes) having a width of 0.2 to 0.8 mm and defining thin flexible ribs (“rib elements”) in shoulder ribs to improve traction such that each rib element has an upper surface in the radial direction, the upper surface has a leading edge and a trailing edge in the circumferential direction, the leading edge and the trailing edge are at different distances to the central axis in the radial direction, and the outer surface of the tread at a portion of the rib that is adjacent the upper surface of the rib element in the lateral direction is located at a same distance from the central axis in the radial direction about the circumferential direction; the sloping surfaces between the leading and trailing edges of the rib elements facilitating action of scraping surfaces of the rib elements [FIGURES 1-2, 12-13] and optionally (2) (A) Lurois teaches providing a heavy truck tire having a tread comprising ribs separated by circumferential grooves and arranging incisions (sipes) having a width greater than zero mm to 3 mm (e.g. 0.6 mm), defining “rib elements” in ribs of the tread and being inclined at angle α = 5 to 15 degrees with respect to radial direction to improve irregular wear wherein difference in height between trailing edge side FU of “rib element” and leading edge side AT of “rib element” is 1 mm to 4.5 mm to improve adherence protentional of trailing edge and resistance to irregular wear [FIGURES 2A-2B, 5, 7, col. 2 lines 11-35, col. 3 lines 54-67, col. 4 lines 1-13, col. 6 lines 7-18 and col. 7 lines 35-42] an/or (B) Japan 775 teaches providing a heavy truck tire having a tread comprising blocks separated by circumferential grooves and arranging kerfs (sipes) having a width such as 0.7 mm in a block on both sides of a rib 112 such that “tread elements” are defined wherein the upper surface of a row of the “tread elements” is sloped with respect to the tread surface such that difference in height between trailing edge side of the “element” and leading edge side of the “element” is 0.5 to 1.5 mm to so that (i) on snow, high braking performance and driving performance are achieved by edge effect or (ii) on ice, high braking performance and driving performance is secured by adhesive frictional force [FIGURES 1-5, 11, machine translation]. Thus, the applied prior art to Bourdon and optionally Lurois and/or Japan 775 provide ample suggestion to provide Radulescu 288’s heavy truck tire comprising ribs defining a tread surface such that the upper surfaces of the “rib elements” delimited by the sipes are sloped with respect to the tread surface (and thereby define leading and trailing edges at different distances) in order to at least improve traction. As to at a same distance, note the tread surface of the ribs between left sipes and the right sipes of Radulescu 288’s tire.
As to claims 2-4, note Radulescu 288’s tire comprises sipes inclined with respect to the radial direction. As to claim 2, these sipes are inclined with respect to the radial direction in one circumferential direction [FIGURE 13] and thereby define a “directional tread”. As to claim 3, the one edge of a “rib element” is a trailing edge and the other edge is a leading edge when the tire is rotated in a first direction. As to claim 4, the one edge of a “rib element” is a leading edge and the other edge is a trailing edge when the tire is rotated in a second direction opposite the first direction.
As to claims 5-6, Radulescu 288 [FIGURE 13] and Bourdon [FIGURES 13-14] teach providing a “rib element" with a flat upper surface.
As to claims 7 and 10, Radulescu 288 teaches sipes having the same length wherein this length is 4 mm to 8 mm [FIGURES 2, 3A-3B, col. 8 lines 32-33].
As to claims 8-9, Bourdon teaches thin flexible ribs (“rib elements”) having a height difference (“distance”) to facilitate action of scraping surfaces of the thin flexible ribs (“rib elements”) [FIGURES 12-13], Lurois teaches “rib elements” having a height difference of 1 mm to 4.5 mm and Japan 775 teaches “tread elements” having a height difference of 0.5 to 1.5 mm.
As to claim 11, Radulescu 288 teaches sipes being parallel to the axial direction [FIGURES 2, 3A].
As to claim 12, Radulescu 288 teaches sipes having a width of 0.20 to 0.40 mm.
As to claim 13, the outer surface of the tread of Radulescu 288’s tire is “rounded” at the first end of the rib element because the outer surface of the tread defines an annular circumferential surface. See FIGURE 1 of Radulescu 288.
As to claim 14, Radulescu 288 teaches a heavy truck tire.
6) Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radulescu 288 (US 6,196,288) in view of Bourdon (US 2,240,542) and optionally Lurois (US 5,896,905) and/or Japan 775 (JP 2007-050775) as applied above and further in view of Radulescu 992 (US 2003/005992).
As to claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Radulescu 288’s heavy truck tire such that the tread is a directional tread and has a rolling direction that is in the circumferential direction, and wherein the leading edge is forward of the tailing edge in the rolling direction, wherein the first micro sipe is inclined relative to the radial direction such that a portion of the first micro sipe closer to the central axis in the radial direction is forward in the rolling direction of a portion of the first micro sipe farther from the central axis in the radial direction, and wherein the second micro sipe is inclined relative to the radial direction such that a portion of the second micro sipe closer to the central axis in the radial direction is forward in the rolling direction of a portion of the second micro sipe farther from the central axis in the radial direction since (1) Radulescu 288 teaches a heavy truck tire having a tread comprising ribs separated by separated by circumferential grooves wherein each rib comprises one end open sipes 12 (micro sipes) extending from a circumferential groove and terminating within the rib [FIGURES 1-2, 3A-3B, col. 8 lines 23-43], the sipes improving retarding irregular wear [col. 4 lines 38-40] and the sipes being inclined at an angle of 5 to 15 degrees with respect to the radial direction to increase robustness of ribs with respect to irregular wear [FIGURE 13, col. 10 lines 28-40] and (2) Radulescu 992 teaches a heavy truck tire having a tread comprising ribs separated by separated by circumferential grooves wherein each rib comprises one end open sipes 46 (micro sipes) extending from a circumferential groove and terminating within the rib [FIGURES 2, 4], the sipes enhancing protection of tire against onset for irregular wear and growth thereof [paragraph 46], the sipes being inclined at an angle with respect to the axial direction so as to define a directional tread pattern [FIGURES 2, 4, paragraph 46] and the sipes being inclined at an angle of 0 to 20 degrees with respect to the radial direction [FIGURE 7C, paragraph 46].
Remarks
7) The remaining references are of interest.
8) No claim is allowed.
9) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN D MAKI whose telephone number is (571)272-1221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Katelyn B Smith (Whatley) can be reached at 571-270-5545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEVEN D MAKI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
June 6, 2025